Video Card and framerates.

A while ago, I posted wondering if my power supply was good enough for an upgrade to a 7600GT or 7900GS. Well I'm considering getting the GT due to space concerns in the case.

I am hesitant on a few fronts however on how to upgrade the computer, and wanted opinions if anyone still wouldn't mind. The computer is:

Athlon 64 3700 (2.2ghz)
Socket 939 motherboard, SATA150, DDR400, AGP
AGP Geforce 6600 256mb
430W Antec TruepowerII, 17A on two rails I believe.
old as dirt case with no front USB
Kingston 1GB ValueRAM DDR400
Viewsonic 19" VX922, 1280x1024 resolution
I used to have 2gb of kingston, but one stick died.

I am getting some low framerates playing a certain online RPG, when multiple characters are on the screen, then framerates are fine looking at most scenery.

This leads me to believe that either the processor is weak, or the graphics card is weak. I am thinking of upgrading to the 7600GT and adding 1gb of ram. However if I do this, and it does not solve the issue, I will have wasted money for the most part... as there is not much more of an upgrade path beyond that.

The other option, and one I am slightly short on money-wise, is to completely overhaul the system.

4200 Athlon 64 X2
Socket AM2 with DDR2, SATA300, PCIe
PCIe 8600GT
2gb DDR2
new case
500-550W power supply

However I am still short on that much of an upgrade.

My continuing reasons to pause are...

Friends in game, claim very little or no lag with Barton Athlon XP 2500 chips, 1gb ram, and Geforce 6200s/9800s

I have seen many forums which laugh at my posts, and say dude you need to get a 6000 X2 with 8800GTX SLI.. but then look at other topics where someone has a 24inch montior, and they tell him he needs a bigger video card because of the resolution he's running at... something like 1600x1200... that a 7600GS won't cut it, he needs like a 7950 or 8600GTS. I don't give this much stock, because most of the users at hardware forums are complete... well nm, but I am wondering if my 19" monitor at 1280x1024 is a bit much for my little 6600 and maybe the 2-3x power upgrade of a 7600GT would be enough.

Some people say my system looks great and it should run fine.
Worried that maybe the motherboard is bad or powersupply if my system should be running this game "fine".

So, I would love to throw a video card and ram stick at this problem and be fixed for 1-2years for 170$, but at the same time I don't want to do that and have it not fixed, wasting the 170$, but I am a little short of a full upgrade to the newer standards.

Windows XP SP2, and the most straining thing I run on it is this older MMORPG. It isn't oblivion, starcraft 2, or some other highly intense game, but it has been called "poorly coded" and a "memory hog" by many players. I guess that happens when you could originally play the game on a geforce2, when it first came out, but it has been patched for years. The system requirements are the same as they were 3 years ago, but the game has seriously become more demanding since then. The game manufact won't really update their system requirements, so I can't get a clear picture of what is needed.

Thanks for any help in advance, hope I am not bothering too many.

Holy crap guy, you're not on TV or anything. If you say the name of the game we're not going to have to pay them royalties or anything. What is it? WoW or FFXI?
How does it play when you turn the graphics and resolution down a bit?

Well it's an older game, :)

Everquest, not everquest II

I configure all particles(sparklies) to off, turn all advanced models(how nice the players look) off, and have tried to play at 1024x768 instead of 1280x1024, but it didn't seem to help or I may have been testing it wrong I guess.
Basically no amount of lowering the settings on the card seems to help. I'll try lowering the resolution again.


*edit*
10fps at 1280x1024
/switch video mode to 640x480
10fps at 640x480

Hmm, does that prove that it's not the video card?

Video card scores in line with others of its class on this system type on 3dmark 2005, 2200 if i remember in a range of 1300-4000. 4000 was a core 2 duo I believe with 2gb ddr2 and a PCIe 6600 or 6600GT.

Performance tests as far as I can tell are fine, on disk, memory, and processor.
It has me baffled. Every time I do some kind of diagnostic on it... "working as intended" or the performance is high, or good. Yet in game.. well 10frames per second isn't very good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

I used to have 2gb of kingston, but one stick died.

---

Kingston have a Lifetime warranty on ValueRAM sticks. Provided your stick didn't die because you were overclocking it or you damaged it, you should look into returning it and getting a replacement. Having the extra gig of memory again certainly would be nice!

Kingston Technology Company - ValueRAM Support - Lifetime Warranty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

I am getting some low framerates playing a certain online RPG, when multiple characters are on the screen, then framerates are fine looking at most scenery.

---

Hmm... characters on screen in an MMORPG? It sounds like your internet connection is suffering because it's trying to download so much information.

How does your computer perform in an off-line game? Something with huge system requirements like Oblivion?

I think he is using PCXs2 right ? 10 fps is all I get with it too. Try their forum, there are people who get over 100 FPS with it

Internet connection is 5mbit/384kbit Cable.
Don't really have a demanding offline game to test it on, would welcome some suggestions though.

I'll look into the Kingston warranty, but I don't really have a receipt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renmiri

I think he is using PCXs2 right ? 10 fps is all I get with it too. Try their forum, there are people who get over 100 FPS with it

---

PCXs2?

Save up a bit and get a good overhaul. Get a 8800gts 320mb since you're using a 19", they're all dropping prices now, you'll be able to play almost any current game out there at 1240x780 maxed out. There's are also dirt cheap 20"+ monitors with higher res, but if you get anything 20"+ you'll need a 640mb. But either card will last you alot longer, for only a few 100$ more.
That'll be around 400-600$ for a 8800gts 320 and a decent 20", depending on where you buy your stuff.
An 8600gt will be fine too if you don't wanna spend that cash, and if you're keen on playing the games you already have at high-max.
Definetly get 2x1gb ram.
DDR2 ram is also dirt cheap.
You'll also need a slightly higher psu, but the corsair 450w would be able to handle a single card setup, and its about 70$. Or you can get the Antec Sonata III case w/ 500w psu for about 30-40$ more, both are good.
I'd change the cpu and mobo too..

Check your current card or bring in your pc in to a tech until then, it might be shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renmiri

I think he is using PCXs2 right ? 10 fps is all I get with it too. Try their forum, there are people who get over 100 FPS with it

---

Those people have Alienware PCs with 4 TB, 4 GB RAM and 4x 3GHz CPUs.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

Internet connection is 5mbit/384kbit Cable.
Don't really have a demanding offline game to test it on, would welcome some suggestions though.

---

Ah, I see. Well...

Wait a minute, Everquest? The recommended system requirements are a Pentium 200MHz, 64MB of RAM and a 500MB of hard disk space. If you can run Windows XP, your computer won't have any problems running Everquest. Nah, it's not your computer that's underperforming; it's the game servers or other players that are causing the lag. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

I'll look into the Kingston warranty, but I don't really have a receipt.

---

If it's a lifetime warranty, proof of when you bought it won't matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Discord

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renmiri

I think he is using PCXs2 right ? 10 fps is all I get with it too. Try their forum, there are people who get over 100 FPS with it

---

Those people have Alienware PCs with 4 TB, 4 GB RAM and 4x 3GHz CPUs.:p

---

:eek: ** Dies of envy!! ** :mog:

Required Specs:

Windows® 98/2000/ME/XP
Pentium® II 400 equivalent or greater
256 MB RAM
ATI Radeon 7500/NVidia GeForce 1 equivalent or greater
DirectX Compatible Sound Card
28.8k + Internet Connection
4X Speed CD-ROM
500MB - 2.6GB Available Hard Drive Space (depending on how many expansions are installed)
DirectX 9.0b
EverQuest Classic and a valid EverQuest account
* Note: All Direct 3D cards not supported.

Recommended Specs:

Windows® 98/2000/ME/XP
Pentium® 4 equivalent or greater
512 MB RAM
NVidia GeForce 3/ATI Radeon 8500 equivalent or greater
DirectX Compatible Sound Card
56.6k + Internet Connection
16X Speed CD-ROM
3.0+ GB Available Hard Drive Space
DirectX 9.0b
EverQuest Classic and a valid EverQuest account
*Note: DirectX 9.0c or greater is required for all Win 98/ME/2000/XP

**edit note**
These requirements have not changed in 4 expansions(2 years), but I believe the graphics and system code have changed quite a bit in those years... introducing a few new models, and updating older areas of the game with the new graphics.

/shrugs... but they won't update their requirements sheet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Discord

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renmiri

I think he is using PCXs2 right ? 10 fps is all I get with it too. Try their forum, there are people who get over 100 FPS with it

---

Those people have Alienware PCs with 4 TB, 4 GB RAM and 4x 3GHz CPUs.:p

---

Alienware PCs with 4 TB, 8-16 GB RAM and 4x 3GHz
:) If Vista at least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

Recommended Specs:

Windows® 98/2000/ME/XP
Pentium® 4 equivalent or greater
512 MB RAM
NVidia GeForce 3/ATI Radeon 8500 equivalent or greater
DirectX Compatible Sound Card
56.6k + Internet Connection
16X Speed CD-ROM
3.0+ GB Available Hard Drive Space
DirectX 9.0b
EverQuest Classic and a valid EverQuest account
*Note: DirectX 9.0c or greater is required for all Win 98/ME/2000/XP

**edit note**
These requirements have not changed in 4 expansions(2 years), but I believe the graphics and system code have changed quite a bit in those years... introducing a few new models, and updating older areas of the game with the new graphics.

/shrugs... but they won't update their requirements sheet.

---

Ah, I see. Even so, you shouldn't be getting a mere 10FPS in it, with recommended requirements that low. I still say that the game servers are causing the slowdown. :)

In fear, extraction point SP demo, I get around 19fps to 40fps with 1024x768 medium settings.

Well, that's pretty good. If you get that performance in FEAR, then I'd say that it's Everquest that's being slow and not your computer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

Alienware PCs with 4 TB, 8-16 GB RAM and 4x 3GHz
:) If Vista at least.

---

If 64-bit, actually. And Alienware suck and are overpriced, there are better ways to get a really good system like that without spending a butt load.

So if FEAR extraction point, at medium settings plays at around 19-38fps, and everquest plays around this same FPS on raids of 50 people in 2-3year old areas, and groups(6) people in the brand new areas, that means everquest is equal to FEAR?

With MAXIMUM settings it is 6fps-10fps in firefights, 20fps elsewhere.
This is with those nice AA/Ansiotropic/Antialias/ and other things on, all settings to max.

Hmm.

Well which component would you turn to if that means video/system is not the problem... which I'm not sure that it proves.

*edited*
Seems it didn't take the first time I set it to max and it was still on medium.. those are the true max numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

So if FEAR extraction point, at medium settings plays at around 19-38fps, and everquest plays around this same FPS on raids of 50 people in 2-3year old areas, and groups(6) people in the brand new areas, that means everquest is equal to FEAR?

---

Not exactly. With Everquest, before the computer can render each frame it has to wait for data from an internet server. If that server becomes slow or bogged down with connections, then it takes longer for your computer to receive the data needed to render each frame.

It's like that with my computer too: Second Life usually is as slow as S.T.A.L.K.E.R. on very high detail settings, if not slower. When playing Unreal Tournament 1999 against the AI, it renders hundreds of frames per second; when I'm playing online, it drops to around 30 and becomes choppy.

With FEAR, the computer doesn't need to wait for data from an Internet server before it renders each frame. But because it has higher system requirements than Everquest, it's harder on your computer and runs slow on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ValiantKnight

Well which component would you turn to if that means video/system is not the problem... which I'm not sure that it proves.

---

The problem's not with your computer, it's with the Everquest server itself.

Forgive me for failing to grasp it but how do others in game claim they have no frame rate problems or lag?

I do not have "lag" in the sense of the word it is in First person shooters, and fast paced games, where a player can "Warp", "ghost", "skip", "slow down/speed up".

However it'll be running at 60-80 fps looking at open flat 3d generated countryside, then turn around and look at a town of 30+ vendors with 10-15 players running around in it, and it drops to 20-30. Crank that up to 60 people running around, and it gets much lower framerate.


Hmm, if it is internet related and nothing to do with the computer, then...

Linksys BEFSR41 4 port switch/firewall nat router
firmware 1.43.3 looks to be outdated, so maybe I'll upgrade that.

Marvell Yukon 88E8001/8003/8010 PCI Gigabit Ethernet Controller

So this is all my internet connection then, which is fast, but apparently has some kind of weird latency or horrible problem that creates this framerate?

I know that in Final Fantasy XI, when you are at a popular auction house (used to be Jeuno, now is Whitegate), it will lag a lot. This isn't because of my computer specs (2.13GHZ Core 2 Duo, 7800GS, 2GB RAM) but because of the game's servers dealing with hundreds of players in a compact area that are accessing a lot of code in the game. (hell, I can run bioshock on max settings at 1600x1050 smoothly!)

It sounds like you're having a similar problem, and it generally has to do with either your connection, your ISP, or the game's servers. Make sure you have all the corresponding ports forwarded (usually documentation from the developers will tell you ideal ports to open).

Not sure what else. Everquest is a very old game and should run absolutely fine on any system built in the last 7 years...

I think Odaisé probably hit the nail on the head by suggesting it's your internet connection, because it doesn't matter what the resolution is. You might want to check that your ISP doesn't shape that type of traffic. You'll also want to check that you have the correct ports forwarded in your router. You can check how to do that here if you need.

You don't need to buy a new graphics card, especially not a 8800gtx/gts/gt/anything, and don't listen to anyone who tells you that you do. The general concensus seems to be that DirectX 10 features thus far are pretty expendable and cost a whole load more than a card almost as powerful like a 7950.
I was able to run Oblivion on my 6600gt with medium settings, so I have no doubt your card is more than capable of running Everquest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omecle

I know that in Final Fantasy XI, when you are at a popular auction house (used to be Jeuno, now is Whitegate), it will lag a lot. This isn't because of my computer specs (2.13GHZ Core 2 Duo, 7800GS, 2GB RAM) but because of the game's servers dealing with hundreds of players in a compact area that are accessing a lot of code in the game. (hell, I can run bioshock on max settings at 1600x1050 smoothly!)

---

By lag, do you mean high latency, or low frame rate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renmiri

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Discord

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renmiri

I think he is using PCXs2 right ? 10 fps is all I get with it too. Try their forum, there are people who get over 100 FPS with it

---

Those people have Alienware PCs with 4 TB, 4 GB RAM and 4x 3GHz CPUs.:p

---

:eek: ** Dies of envy!! ** :mog:

---

Exactly! I wouldn't mind having one either, but considering the fact that it'll cost me about 13 000 Euro (monitor not included), I might just as well spend them on something else. Link's below:

Alienware: Area-51 ALX Desktop s- Learn More!

You can try configuring it and see what happens. It's, simply put, insane. Even the PS3 is a doodle compared to that thing.

Mine is low framerate.

Basically I was deciding whether to spend a smaller amount on a 7600GT 256mb and replace or buy another ram stick, and perhaps replace/get an extra fan. Since I really don't plan on getting into a higher end game or anything close to requiring the power of a newer system to my knowledge. Vista is still buggy and I doubt I'll go to it for a long time.

So for 2~ years, I want to make this system run my game, and do normal things, no video editing, no first person shooters. It's only been january~ 2006 when I upgraded it to this, and hence the wondering why it was slowing down so soon.

I've configured the router to forward all ports mentioned, according to the company, the game does not really do much incoming unless it was actually first generated by the PC, but I forwarded them anyway. (most firewalls will let in a packet if an outgoing packet generated it, or something to that effect, ie... in response to. At least most residential firewall/routers will).

Change ISPs? or how would I go about investigating the ISP and if it is contributing to the low framerate.

Thanks again for all the responses.

You can probably find out from your current ISP's website (or from their tech support) if they're shaping gaming applications or ports.

It may not be your ISP that's slowing you down though. If you're using wireless, you should have a strong signal without interference. Regardless, you definitely shouldn't have more than 2 metres of ADSL cable if you use DSL.

Wired CAT5e cabling, Linksys wired router/firewall/switch.
Time warner cable/Road Runner

Don't see any mention on the website of port work, but will try tech support.
Thanks :)
I sent in my RMA for the ram, and still might think about getting a 7600, because its only around 100$, and my 6600 still gets up to 80-84C at times. Also going to grab a new set of fans for it.
I think I'll stay with the system for a little while, and upgrade fully later.

That's pretty hot for anything in your PC to be getting. Even if it's not heat causing the problem, I'd definitely invest in a couple of case fans if I were you.

I doubt you'll notice much of a performance increase in changing to a 7600. I have a 7600GS in one of my computers, and it didn't really provide better performance than my 6600GT which I had in my main PC. That could be something for you to consider.

When I say ADSL, I mean the length of cable from the router to the phone jack. Unless you're actually using cat5 as your phone line (possible, but not standard), it will be a different looking cable.

The coax cable comes straight in from the cable box on the side of the house... literally on the other side of the wall from where my modem is...
2 TVs, and the cable modem.. then a 5ft~ cat5e comes off the cable modem to the linksys. Then a 50ft cat5e comes thru the attic to my comptuer.

The video card ranges from 60C(idle probably 65C depending) to 84C.
The CPU is 39C(idle) to 51C(load)
The case is 30C(idle) to 38C(load)

6600GT to a 7600GS is about the same card :)
It's an slightly faster/better memory mid-range 6series to a regular mid-range 7series. The 6600GT pulls more power and heats up more. The 7600GS has heat and power saving features, while still maintaining the power of a 6600GT, mostly.


7600GS vs 6600GT

7600GT vs 6600

The 7600 has a bigger pipeline, but the 6600GT drives faster down it's narrower pipeline because of the GDDR3 ram